Psychological, Social, Cultural, Literary and Legal Dimensions of Memory
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PSYCHOLOGICAL, SOCIAL, CULTURAL, LITERARY AND LEGAL DIMENSIONS OF MEMORY * MIROSŁAW MICHAŁ SADOWSKI I. INTRODUCTION Despite the fearful predictions of ‘the end of history’ made at the beginning of the 1990s, the past 20 years have not only proved to be at least as fruitful in terms of historical events as all the previous ones, but have also seen an unprecedented interest in memory. This, as I note later, led some researchers to say we are living in times of ‘hypertrophy of memory’. Never before have so many different disciplines investigated the mysteries behind the ways we remember, trying to show that memory does influence various sciences, from sociology, to law and to literature. But can we, ‘the people of the 21st century’, answer this very simple question: What exactly is memory? Encyclopaedia Britannica states that memory is ‘the encoding, storage, and retrieval in the human mind of past experiences.’1 Later on in this definition, we learn that there are different kinds of memory: musical, short-term, long-term, logical, local, mechanical, eyewitness, autobiographical. Such a perplexing definition does not help us understand what exactly memory is, and it fails to indicate that the question of the workings of memory lies not only in the scope of medicine (neuroscience in particular) and psychology (particularly the cognitive variety), but also philosophy, sociology, law, history, and literature, all of which have created numerous theories explaining how it works. In my paper, looking at memory from a socio-legal perspective, I hope not only to show exactly how it works in each and every one of us, but also to collate different hypotheses formed by the disciplines listed above, which are trying to explain the workings and the influence of memory on the world around us. DOI: 10.1515/wrlae-2015-0029 * Law student at the Faculty of Law, Administration and Economics, University of Wrocław. 1 <britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/374487/memory> accessed 25 April 2015. 141 142 Wroclaw Review of Law, Administration & Economics [Vol 5:1 II. NEUROSCIENTIFIC AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DIMENSIONS OF MEMORY Since time immemorial, people have been thinking how exactly memory works. At first it was thought that memorising is an easy psychological process. Ancient Greeks had lively debates, trying to define where our thoughts live: Plato thought their home is in our brain, while Aristotle pinpointed the heart.2 In the early modern period, the basis of the research of the mind and memory were created (in the works of Andreas Vesalius in the 16th century, or Thomas Willis in the 17th, for example), but it was only in the 19th century that the more specific functions of our brain were discovered. More detailed research into the memory dates back to the 1950s, but we are still a long way from its full understanding. In modern research on memory there are three very important classifications on the basis of: its length (short-term and long-term memory), the type of stimulus and the degree of ‘engagement’ of our consciousness into encoding and decoding information.3 There are many different theories of how we remember. An important one is the so called ‘chemical theory’, which is based on the concept of ‘memory units’, or engrams — traces of memory. It is supposedly created through the interaction of different chemical substances created during the process of learning. The engram is the basis of future reconstruction of memories and experiences. What is particularly interesting is that it does not have to be related to consciousness; it can result in a change of behaviour. The process of memorising may be schematized in the following way:4 After receiving an information, our brain analyses it using the sensory memory (that is, a registry of senses). This type of memory is characterised by a very short period of duration (0.5 second), huge capacity (it stores up to 99% of received information), and presence in all of our sense organs (eyes, ears, etc.). Later the information finds its way into short-term memory. It stores just a little amount of it for a short period (up to 20 seconds); it is also used in transforming the results of the processes taking place in our mind (for example, the results of calculations or conclusions of reasoning). Subsequently, the information is either forgotten or transferred to long-term 2 A Rajewska-Rager and J Rybakowski, ‘Współczesne modele pamięci w aspekcie neurobiologicznym i klinicznym’ [2006] Postępy Psychiatrii i Neurologii 105. 3 ibid 106. 4 ibid. Unless otherwise indicated, all translations from Polish to the English are the author’s. 2015] PSYCHOLOGICAL, SOCIAL, CULTURAL, LITERARY 143 AND LEGAL DIMENSIONS OF MEMORY memory. It is a sort of ‘warehouse of engrams’ (traces of memory); it theoretically has unlimited capacity and duration of remembrance. The mechanism of evoking certain information is in fact the process of evoking them from long-term memory. It takes place in two stages: firstly, the right information is recovered and retraced, and, secondly, in the process of decision-distinction, the right data are chosen from all those evoked from the depths of memory in the current situation.5 Although the mechanisms of remembering and evoking an enormous amount of information enable us to live everyday life, human memory is nor free from errors. Daniel L. Schacter classified and described as many as seven of them, calling them ‘the seven sins of memory’. The first one is the sin of transience, which consists in forgetting facts with the passing of time because of wiping out the past along with remembering new information. The second one, the sin of absent- mindedness, consists in forgetting about little everyday things, because of wrong encoding or overlooking in the attempt of evoking them. The third one is the sin of blocking, which consists in blocking a piece of information, that we are sure we know (we have it on the tip of our tongue) because of some other information which distracts our attention at a given moment and prevents us from evoking the right ones. The fourth, the sin of misattribution, consists in colligating entirely different, individual elements of experience in one untrue homogenous whole because of incorrectly tying up an event to a certain time or place, or because of confusing a real event with the one we have only heard of or imagined. The fifth one is the sin of suggestibility, which consists in adding misleading information from another source (people, the media) to our own memories, because of a tendency of memory to change our statements about the past under the influence of congestion of information, wrong information, or suggestive questions. The sixth, the sin of bias, consists in transforming past events in such a way that they accord with our current outlook on life and our current needs because of filtering the past events through our present knowledge, or reconstructing the past in such a way that it is very similar or very different to the present day. The last one, the sin of persistence, consists in persistently returning to a certain memory (such as, for example, rape, death of a close person, war, but also a melody or a song which is constantly ‘playing’ in our mind), because of unaverage intensity of that memory, which stops the natural process of weakening memories. 6 III. SOCIAL DIMENSIONS OF MEMORY As I have indicated at the beginning of this paper, the mechanisms of memory fascinate not only psychologists or psychiatrists, but also researchers from other fields. Sociologists are particularly interested in the existence of collective memory (also known as ‘public history’). They say that one’s memory is not shaped individually (as psychologists suggest), because all of 5 PH Lindsay and DA Norman, Human Information Processing (2nd edn, Academic Press 1977) 304-307. 6 D Schacter, The Seven Sins of Memory (Mariner Books 2001). 144 Wroclaw Review of Law, Administration & Economics [Vol 5:1 us are principally influenced by society. ‘I usually recall because others induce me to do it; their memory is trying to help my memory, and my memory finds support in theirs; […] the groups I belong to at any moment give me the means to their [memories] reconstruction, on condition that I turn to them and embrace their way of thinking for at least one moment,’ said one of the very first French sociologists Maurice Halbwachs. 7 Social frames of memory are for him ‘the instruments which collective memory uses in order to recreate the picture of the past concordant in each era with the ideas currently prevailing in the society.’ 8 Sociologists also claim that memory is only in part determined by the past, and first and foremost decided on by the present.9 We can find an interesting confirmation that social beliefs really do have a profound impact on our memory, in a poem by a 19th-century Polish poet Bolesław Czerwiński entitled ‘The Last Bałaguła’ [‘Ostatni Bałaguła’]. The symptomatic lines say: ‘In a hundred years, when about the Jewish cabs/ A lecture will someone tell — he will raise a laugh./ Who will know what horse waggons were —/ And the respectable guild of bałagułas?!’. 10 Bałagułas, Jewish horse waggons, were extremely popular in southern and eastern Poland until about a hundred years ago. But the expansion of railways and cars excised them not only from our landscape, but also of our language, and thus — memory. Collective memory is also connected with the term ‘postmemory’, a term cointed by Marianne Hirsch. She claims that ‘postmemory characterises the experience of those who grow up dominated by narratives that preceded their birth, whose own belated stories are evacuated by the stories of the previous generation shaped by traumatic events that can neither be understood nor recreated’11: for example the Holocaust in the memory of the Germans of the Jews.